Personality Cafe banner
1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Is it me, or do INFP's hardly talk about Si consciously? Is Si taboo? lol.

http://personalitycafe.com/infp-articles/3138-infps-infps.html
Tertiary- Introverted Sensing/Si: Introverted Sensing is a staple for INFPs. Even though it's tertiary it's usually being put into good use by remembering specific details, and also remembering how things were. When an INFP takes in information, they will process it through their Fi, Ne, and Si. The Si part of an INFP will remember the details about an experience or thing, and relate it to how it was before and will check for changes or inconsistencies. Ne is the fuzzy part of an INFP's perception of the world, and Si is the concrete part of an INFP's perception of the world. An INFP will remember the details of something, and this is put into use especially when making decisions for leisure. How did this make me feel before? What about it made me feel this way? Questions like that will be asked and answered in their heads. If Fi and Ne fail them in a situation then Si will take command, checking for details and linking them to past experiences. Si is the INFP's relief function, meaning that use of this function is generally used for relief and reassurance. With this in mind ISFJs and ISTJs make excellent people to be in an INFP's life, due to their dominant Si.
http://personalitycafe.com/cognitiv...iled-descriptions-each-function-attitude.html
Si, or introverted Sensing, is dominant for ISxJ, secondary for ESxJ, tertiary for INxP and inferior for ENxP. It's related to Se in that it deals with sensory experience, but rather than constantly scan for everything about what's going on now, it relies on internalizing those experiences into an extremely detailed internal map of highly vivid *memories* of those past sensory experiences. This dependence on reliving past experience and using it as a guide for the present leads to an extremely good memory for detail, and a general attitude that going with what we know for sure from having experienced it before is usually best.

Si is the opposite of Ne because rather than relate new information to some larger external, constantly changing pattern, it tries to relate all new information to something it already knows, some sensory data that it's absorbed from its past experiences. This leads to the classic Ne vs. Si battle: Ne wants to try something new just for the sake of doing something different and finding something interesting; Si wants to stick to what we've done before because its vivid memories of direct experience allow us to relate the new information to that past information we've already absorbed.

It's a common misconception that Si users are traditionalists on principle. In my experience, many older Si users (xSxJ types have Si as dom/secondary) are traditionalists because the only source of information they had was their parents and the traditions they were raised with, but these days many younger SJs are much less traditionalist in nature because information is so much more freely available than it was just a few generations ago. Si is not into tradition just for the sake of tradition; it just likes to relate new information to something it already knows. Rules and traditions can be a convenient way to do this, but it's a mistake to believe that Si always leads to traditionalism for its own sake.

Si also does some really cool stuff like perfect pitch...I have one ISFJ friend (Si dominant) who can tap into his past sensations of what a particular note sounded like and use it to identify some note he hears now as a G#. That's amazing to me...as an Ne dom I only understand notes in terms of their relationship to other notes in a larger pattern; Josh just taps right into his detailed sensory memory and can identify the note by remembering what it sounded like before, on its own.

Si doms like to collect objects and facts that evoke pleasurable memories from the past. An Si who's into history will collect books, photos, stamps, etc...an Si who's into music will collect instruments, sheet music, photos of concerts, and so on. Many Si types love scrapbooking because looking back at those old photos evokes those powerful, highly detailed sensory experiences from the past.

On a more morbid note, Dexter (from the TV series "Dexter") is probably ISTJ. He collects blood slides because they evoke the detailed memories of his most enjoyable murder experiences from the past. =/
Do you guys relate to any of this?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,402 Posts
I raise you this description of Si:

Liquid Light (He's probably tired of me quoting him) said:
To that end Introverted anything is simply the referencing of the self first. With the perception functions it is inner archetypal content that is being referenced. Introverted Sensing is the projection of your own manifestation of an archetype onto an object so that in essence your own personal perception of the object (the fire is inviting - an archetypal reference relating your own manifestation of what inviting is) becomes more important than the intrinsic qualities of the object (the fire is hot or orange). Extraverted Sensing simply sees the object as it is, without projecting anything more into it. So introverted sensing becomes a highly impressionistic perception, wherein how an object comes across to you takes precedence. So for example Ansel Adams would likely be a Se-type capturing the object as is, where Monet or Van Gogh would most certainly be Si-types (in fact Jung uses Van Gogh as a reference for Introverted Sensing).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
541 Posts
Hmm yeah.. I feel the same way as @Vox haha.

Though I understand how Se works, since one of my best friends who I live with is ISTP. We are great together, there are very seldom any kind of conflicts between us. But she an my ENFP friend who we also live with, they are just like cat and dog. Terrible.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,074 Posts
My particular Si is extremely good at saving data that comes from stories and books I read. You probably wouldn't believe how I am able to retrieve a piece of data from a book that I had read months before. It has become very useful for when I direct a tabletop RPG session.
 

·
Registered
INFP 4w5
Joined
·
1,285 Posts
I think I am one of what seems to me like the few INFPs who is quite comfortable with Si. It's very understated. It's not something I take as much pleasure in exploring and discussing as, say, Fi, but it is omnipresent. It manifests itself in myriad ways - one of them my attention to detail and the way I can be very particular about things in general - for example, I like my food to be prepared in particular ways and I pay close interest to individual flavours and textures and the way the whole thing comes together. I can be very critical because of what I consider my sensitivity, as I can differentiate between minute differences in perceived quality which can drastically affect how much I enjoy something - music is another good example. I suppose even errors in spelling and grammar bother me, if only slightly, as I can remember grimacing at the English on display in Spain when I went on holiday, and I wouldn't have been older than 10. I rarely let other people know just how critical I can be, though, because it doesn't seem fair. I'm actually easy to please, but impossible to satisfy completely.

I also have a hugely nostalgic streak and very vivid memories of anything that affected me on a personal level. In this way it is quite self-referential because I can remember trivial details nobody else really cares about due to the personal significance, but the detail is certainly present. I also tend to have a nigh-encyclopedic knowledge of a select few subject areas as a result of my voracious curiosity as regards things I have been passionate about at least once. I tend to like to keep souvenirs of phases I have been through in my life. Even long after they have lost their direct personal relevance I will always take solace in the memories and the part of me that those experiences became.

It's kind of hard to describe effectively. But even though it's not the top of my function list I consider it very much a part of me. Much more so than Se at least; in fact, I consider all of my shadow functions quite alien, with the possible (and debatable) exception of Ni.

Also, as a quick aside:

Alediran said:
You probably wouldn't believe how I am able to retrieve a piece of data from a book that I had read months before. It has become very useful for when I direct a tabletop RPG session.
I've never played the tabletop games, but from when I was playing D&D-based CRPGs fervently in my mid teens I still probably have their entire wizard and priest spellbooks memorised, complete with level, effects, saving throw modifiers, and the builds they work most effectively with :tongue:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
299 Posts
It's an unconscious process, until something is 'wrong' or 'different', be it spelling, taste or sound. It's just one of those things you never give much thought, so yes. It is in a sense overlooked for something that is so useful!

Also, Liquidlights description was really good!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
Per latest cognitive test I took here http://personalitycafe.com/infp-for...-functions-enneagram-types-3.html#post2267252 my Si is only at average use.
Same story for me. Except that I leave Se unused, whereas you seem to have good uses for it.

I can sort of relate to Si's stereotype traditionalism though. About a year ago I took a management drives test (a test that explains your drives/motivations behind your behavior at work), which brought to light that I'm primary yellow, supported by purple. I'll explain xD

Yellow: analyzing, conceptualizing, formulating vision, innovating, inspiring, freedom seeking
Purple: creating safety, creating family-feeling, keeping traditions alive, keeping/safeguarding identity, honing craftsmanship, passing on experience

When I first heard my result, I was surprised. Yellow and purple seemed to be contradictory, since yellow seems to be more of a free spirit thing whereas purple seeks the familiar. But now I can sort of relate it to MBTI: it's in a way comparable to Ne-Si.

I think my average Si use explains why I hardly relate to the visual arts and threads like INFP Porn (technically, the other way around xD). ^^;
 
  • Like
Reactions: Sily

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,402 Posts
Sometimes I feel like shouting "Si doesn't have to fixate on the past!" and then I stop. Because that's what it does for types who are mainly Ne (I'm speaking mostly of Ne dominants there though, not so much Ne auxiliaries like INFPs). Sticks them down.

Ne in me likes to break stuff up. It has a very low regard for my Si conceptions of the world. It wants to smash through them to get to what's really there. Which isn't all bad. Keeps me from becoming too sure I'm right.
 

·
Registered
ENTP 6w7-9w8-3w4 so/sx
Joined
·
798 Posts
I raise you this description of Si:
To that end Introverted anything is simply the referencing of the self first. With the perception functions it is inner archetypal content that is being referenced. Introverted Sensing is the projection of your own manifestation of an archetype onto an object so that in essence your own personal perception of the object (the fire is inviting - an archetypal reference relating your own manifestation of what inviting is) becomes more important than the intrinsic qualities of the object (the fire is hot or orange). Extraverted Sensing simply sees the object as it is, without projecting anything more into it. So introverted sensing becomes a highly impressionistic perception, wherein how an object comes across to you takes precedence. So for example Ansel Adams would likely be a Se-type capturing the object as is, where Monet or Van Gogh would most certainly be Si-types (in fact Jung uses Van Gogh as a reference for Introverted Sensing).
I relate to this extremely well, especially when I'm writing of the past; I find that when I'm simply remembering things without much other aim, my memory doesn't seem that extraordinary, and at times I feel a bit disconnected from it. As soon as a desire to retell or record (usually writing) gets involved, my mind explodes with thousands of details, connections, metaphors, associated emotions, etc. Sometimes I have to wonder if I'm not just unconsciously making stuff up :unsure:

I do have an eye for detail and often exasperate/annoy others by focusing on them. It bogs me down as well, since I have an extremely difficult time filtering out the unimportant details...They're all important to me! :sad: Darn time restraints.

Maybe the wording in the OP threw me off before...Hmm.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,800 Posts
Sometimes I feel like shouting "Si doesn't have to fixate on the past!" and then I stop. Because that's what it does for types who are mainly Ne (I'm speaking mostly of Ne dominants there though, not so much Ne auxiliaries like INFPs). Sticks them down.

Ne in me likes to break stuff up. It has a very low regard for my Si conceptions of the world. It wants to smash through them to get to what's really there. Which isn't all bad. Keeps me from becoming too sure I'm right.
If i meet someone new and they have habits of lets say someone i knew from the past. I become weary of them and really study them intensely, is this my Si trying to make a connection or correlation with something new compared with something old ? Lets say that i think to myself, wait " she reminds very much of X, the way she acts. I didn't really connect well with X because of this , so its likely i won't connect with X. Is that Si trying to tell me something ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Ryosuke93

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,402 Posts
If i meet someone new and they have habits of lets say someone i knew from the past. I become weary of them and really study them intensely, is this my Si trying to make a connection or correlation with something new compared with something old ? Lets say that i think to myself, wait " she reminds very much of X, the way she acts. I didn't really connect well with X because of this , so its likely i won't connect with X. Is that Si trying to tell me something ?
Hmm, it might be Si giving that association between this person (Here Si defined " this person" by the way they acted) and the "X" person in your mind (I know the way I describe it makes it sound like X doesn't exist, but I'm trying to convey the introvertedness). You also try to examine for clues, which I think is Ne.
 

·
Registered
INFP 4w5
Joined
·
1,285 Posts
Sometimes I feel like shouting "Si doesn't have to fixate on the past!" and then I stop. Because that's what it does for types who are mainly Ne (I'm speaking mostly of Ne dominants there though, not so much Ne auxiliaries like INFPs). Sticks them down.
I'm quite aware; that goes without saying. But it also goes without saying that if a function is in a tertiary position it will not only be far more likely to be less developed and expressed than for those to whom it is more central, but also subservient to higher functions. If I think about what I believe to be my own use of Si then I really can't deny it's wholly owned by Fi. It predominantly tends to be a sense of the way I feel things should be based on past experience and my system of values, which are informed by both the emotional aspect and my own conclusions upon reflection. Ultimately, it's because of the strong personal relevance and warm feelings associated with those things, which can then be extrapolated on a larger scale (taking care to avoid projection).

Also, even things like aesthetic tastes, differences in texture, sounds, forms... it all boils down the way I subjectively experience them. My attention to detail and ability to keenly sift through reams of factual information and the discrepancies therein is primarily motivated by the passion I have towards the subject. All of which seems to be nicely and summarily captured by the passage you quoted, in a far more eloquent and succinct way than I could conjure:

Introverted Sensing is the projection of your own manifestation of an archetype onto an object so that in essence your own personal perception of the object (the fire is inviting - an archetypal reference relating your own manifestation of what inviting is) becomes more important than the intrinsic qualities of the object (the fire is hot or orange).
For me, Ne is like living in a paradigm of infinite possibilities. It can lead to thrilling discoveries (synthesis of seemingly unrelated information and ideas) and is the source of the bulk of my exuberance, but it also makes me damn absent-minded. Ah well, rough with the smooth I guess?
 
  • Like
Reactions: Owfin

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
If i meet someone new and they have habits of lets say someone i knew from the past. I become weary of them and really study them intensely, is this my Si trying to make a connection or correlation with something new compared with something old ? Lets say that i think to myself, wait " she reminds very much of X, the way she acts. I didn't really connect well with X because of this , so its likely i won't connect with X. Is that Si trying to tell me something ?
I'd say it's Si. Comparing the new with something old, to specific detail and trying to predict the future. Although I think Si is more about anticipation, a certain readiness, in my mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: MuChApArAdOx

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,800 Posts
I'd say it's Si. Comparing the new with something old, to specific detail and trying to predict the future. Although I think Si is more about anticipation, a certain readiness, in my mind.
Thanks for answering that . I should have actually asked in this question in ISTJ forum, they would have been happy to answer that for me. Oh never mind, i just realized i was in an Si thread, heh, sorry i was on a different planet for a moment there ;p duh :D

This anticipation, is that already having a pre-determined outcome ? Would i be relating what i know to be true from past experience with what is the probable outcome of my new experience ? Is that Si ? Or am i making these decisions, or tapping into the previous as the most likely possibility Ne. IDK, hangs herself ;D XD

Si is subjective like all other introverted functions, i wonder if its as stubborn as Fi ? Is it like other introverted functions that are really hard to define verbally ? Like Fi/Ni?Ti
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,390 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Thanks for answering that . I should have actually asked in this question in ISTJ forum, they would have been happy to answer that for me. Oh never mind, i just realized i was in an Si thread, heh, sorry i was on a different planet for a moment there ;p duh :D

This anticipation, is that already having a pre-determined outcome ? Would i be relating what i know to be true from past experience with what is the probable outcome of my new experience ? Is that Si ? Or am i making these decisions, or tapping into the previous as the most likely possibility Ne. IDK, hangs herself ;D XD

Si is subjective like all other introverted functions, i wonder if its as stubborn as Fi ? Is it like other introverted functions that are really hard to define verbally ? Like Fi/Ni?Ti
We're all from different planets, just happened to be stranded on the same planet :D

Well, the problem that I see with Si: it's our third function (INFP's) and it's your inferior (ENFP). Supposedly you're not using Si much, if at all - the test I took here Keys 2 Cognition, 2 days ago, told me my Si usage is average and my Se remains unused (and it profiled me as most likely INFJ, then ENFP, then INFP...). Yesterday, my results were Si: limited and Se, unused (though INFP>ENFP>INTP). So yah I'm thinking I'm bad at filling in tests in a consistent manner, but that aside, if I'm an INFP and my Si is limited, then 'statistically', your Si usage should be even less. As the unique MuChApArAdOx you are, you may have developed using Si, of course ^^

Nonetheless, I can give a hypothetical answer :D

I think Si-dom in general takes the old (trustworthy) experience, compares the new experience with it and anticipates on the possibilities to mold the new experiences and its consequences/outcomes/continuations so they resemble the old one (which was trustworthy, thus desirable). That's my idea of Si.

When I translate this to your story of meeting someone who, in a certain aspect, reminds you of someone else, it sounds a little something like this: If you study them intensely and compare them to what you remember ("This guy drinks his coffee like this previous neighbor of mine, 2 sugars and 2 milk, perhaps he's a sweettooth as well), that is Si. If you study them intensely and look at the bigger picture to figure them out ("Wearing a raincoat, but it's not raining outside! Why?!") that's more likely Ne. But possibly, Ne will also gather information from Si perceivings - connecting the dots in a big, timeless picture.

When you say this: "Y reminds me very much of X, the way she acts. I didn't really connect well with X because of this, so it's likely I won't connect with Y." that's pretty Si-like (I altered your sentence a bit, because I think this is what you meant). It would be even more Si-like if you added: "If Y starts really puts up that act like X did so often, I'm outta here." That's what I more or less mean with anticipation: an attitude, expectation, a certain readiness. Almost making it a self-fulfilling prophecy, so to speak.

Because you didn't mention anything about this or that about Y being different from X while ignoring factors unrelated to X, it's most likely not Ne. If you add Ne in the mix, you might say the following: "Y reminds me very much of X, the way they respond to criticism. I didn't really connect well with X because of that, but Y is older than X, she might be able to accept criticism easier."

So... from what you wrote, I'd say that is Si. Definitely so if it were accompanied with a certain anticipation of the future ("it's gonna suck, we're not gonna connect"). Would you however decide to try having an open attitude to see if a connection develops because you think she/he and/or the context might be different, that would more Ne-ish.

If you hadn't hanged yourself yet, is now the time? Since I don't think I'm making it easier... xD ^^;

Okay, so next. Si stubbornly subjective? Yes, I think so. Se would be more flexible, I think Si-dom vs Se-dom is like Fi-dom vs Fe-dom. Is it hard to define? Not if you're an ISTJ, I imagine. ^^

Yay, or nay? xD
 
  • Like
Reactions: MuChApArAdOx
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top